Class Descriptors or Class Relations? Thoughts Towards a Critique of Savage et al.
Class Descriptors or Class Relations? Thoughts Towards a Critique of Savage et al.
复制标题
类描述符还是类关系？
DOI：
10.1177/0038038514520855
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
H. Bradley
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
H. Bradley
萨维奇等人的工作。关于《英国大阶级调查》，被认为是对重新焕发活力的关于阶级的社会学研究议程的重要贡献，具有重大的公众影响，但有人认为，这一分析虽然大胆，并对当前的社会变革作出了回应，但存在缺陷。发现了三个弱点：对阶级的方法是分级的，而不是关系的；模型中使用的文化资本标记具有高度的选择性，因此扭曲了经验研究结果，并导致了对工人阶级文化的负面看法；分析得出的潜在阶级模型不连贯，分组可能更好地区分为阶级部分。最后，提出了一种替代的基于演绎的班级图式，试图适应当代的变化。
The work of Savage et al. in relation to the Great British Class Survey is acknowledged as an important contribution to a reinvigorated sociological research agenda on class, with a major public impact, but it is argued that the analysis, although bold and responsive to current social transformations, is flawed. Three weaknesses are identified: the approach to class is gradational, not relational; the markers of cultural capital used in the model are highly selective, therefore skewing the empirical findings, and lead to a negative view of working-class culture; and the model of latent classes resulting from the analysis is not coherent, with groupings that might be better distinguished as class fractions. Finally, an alternative deductively based class schema is proposed, which tries to accommodate contemporary change.